TELECOMMUNICATION INSTALLATION

FOR

Mobile Broadband Network Ltd (MBNL)

AT

Slade Hill Farm Co-Location, Off Slipperlow Lane, Taddington, Peak District, Buxton, Derbyshire, SK17 9TP.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION FORM

May 2011

Prepared By

Daly International

MBNL Ref: DED003 (63680), Slade Hill Farm Co-Location

## SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

### 1. Site Details

| Site Name: | Slade Hill Farm Co-Location | |------------|-----------------------------| | NGR: | 413453, 371005 | | Site Address: | Slade Hill Farm, Off Slipperlow Lane, Taddington, Peak District, Buxton, Derbyshire, SK17 9TP | | Site Ref Number: | DED003 (63680) | | Site Type: | Macro |

### 2. Pre Application Check List

#### Site Selection

| Question | Yes | No | |--------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----|----| | Was an LPA mast register used to check for suitable sites by the operator or the LPA? | Yes | No | | If no explain why: The proposal is an upgrade of an existing development. | | | | Was the industry site database checked for suitable sites by the operator: | Yes | No | | If no explain why: The proposal is an upgrade of an existing development. | | |

#### Annual roll out consultation with LPA

| Date of last annual rollout information/submission: | October 2010 | | Name of Contact: | Chief Planning Officer | | Summary of outcome/Main issues raised: | None known |

#### Pre-application consultation with LPA

| Date of written offer of pre-application consultation: | N/A | | Was there pre-application contact: | Yes | No | | Date of pre-application contact: | N/A | | Name of contact: | N/A |

#### Ten Commitments Consultation

| Rating of Site under Traffic Light Model: | Green | Amber | Red |

______________________________________________________________________

1 Macro or Micro Outline Consultation carried out: None required

Summary of outcome/Main issues raised: n/a

**School/College**

Location of site in relation to school/college: Taddington and Priestcliffe Primary School – approx 440m from site.

Outline of consultation carried out with school/college: None required due to the scale of this development consultation not deemed necessary.

Summary of outcome/Main issues raised: n/a

**Civil Aviation Authority/Secretary of State for Defence/Aerodrome Operator consultation** (only required for an application for prior approval)

| Will the structure be within 3km of an aerodrome or airfield? | Yes | No | |---------------------------------------------------------------|-----|----| | Has the Civil Aviation Authority/Secretary of State for Defence/Aerodrome Operator been notified? | Yes | n/a |

Details of response: n/a

**Developer's Notice**

| Relevant Certificate Signed | Yes | No | |----------------------------|-----|----| | Date Notice served: | | 09/05/2011 |

**Proposed Development**

The proposed site: Slade Hill Farm Co-Location, Off Slipperlow Lane, Taddington, Buxton, Derbyshire, SK17 9TP

NRG: E413453 N371005 Type of Structure:

Description:

This application comprises the installation of a 300mm dish antenna to be fixed by a support pole to an existing telecommunications monopole at a site on Slade Hill Farm, along with association cabling to be attached within the existing cable tray and equipment to be installed inside an existing equipment cabinet (see drawings). The new dish will be designed and coloured to match the existing equipment.

| Overall Height: | 7.2m | |-----------------|------| | Height of existing building: | 10m (monopole height) | | Equipment Housing: | Not changing | | Length: | n/a | | Width: | n/a | | Height: | n/a |

Materials:

Tower/mast etc – type of material and external colour: Plastic and steel dish antenna and cabling – all coloured to match the existing equipment

Equipment housing – type of material and external colour: Existing

Reasons for choice of design:

It is considered that the siting of the 300mm dish antenna upon an existing telecommunications monopole is a suitable location for the necessary equipment. The dish will link with another ‘everything everywhere’ site to the north of the current site.

It is considered that, in spite of the monopole being sited within the Peak District National Park, the proposed development is a minimal addition and will not have an impact upon the setting or have a negative visual impact on the National Park.

Views to the proposed development are not possible from any property in the area or from any of the surrounding roads or lanes. From walking around the local area it is apparent that, unless that one knows where to look, the existing telecommunications apparatus is not visible in general views. Furthermore, views from the surrounding fields are limited due to the natural relief of the area and given the proposed development will be attached with existing telecommunications apparatus it is considered that the equipment, subject of this application will not be prominent, incongruous or inappropriate. The existing monopole has also been screened from lower levels by a 1.3m high stone wall to further ensure it blends into the natural surroundings.

3. Technical Information

ICNIRP Declaration attached

ICNIRP public compliance is determined by mathematical calculation and implemented by careful location of antennas, access restrictions and/or barriers and signage as necessary. Members of the public cannot unknowingly enter areas close to the antennas where exposure may exceed the relevant guidelines.

| Yes | No | |-----|----| | NOT REQUIRED AS THIS IS NOT AN APPLICATION FOR AN ANTENNA SUBJECT TO | When determining compliance the emissions from all mobile phone network operators on the site are taken into account.

| Frequency: | ICNIRP GUIDELINES | |-----------|--------------------| | 2G: GSM 1816.5 – 1846.5MHz | 2G - Gaussian Minimum Shift Keying (GMSK) | | 3G: UMTS 2149.7 – 2159.7MHz | 3G - Quadrature Phase Shift Keying (QPSK) |

| Modulation characteristics | Power output (expressed in EIRP in dBW per carrier) | |---------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------| | 2G - Gaussian Minimum Shift Keying (GMSK) | Maximum licensed power output (EIRP) is 62dBm (32dBw) | | 3G - Quadrature Phase Shift Keying (QPSK) | |

In order to minimise interference within its own network and with other radio networks, T-Mobile and 3 operates their networks in such a way the radio frequency power outputs are kept to the lowest levels commensurate with effective service provision. As part of T-Mobile and 3’s networks the radio base station that is the subject of this application will be configured to operate in this way.

| Height of antenna (m above ground level) | 7.2m – however this is a dish rather than a panel antenna. |

4. **Technical Justification**

**Reason(s) why site required e.g. coverage, upgrade, capacity:**

Owing to a network-sharing project being undertaken by ‘everything everywhere’ at a number of sites existing telecommunications apparatus is being utilised by both operators: T-Mobile and Orange, however, this proposal will also be utilised by ‘3’. This proposal will then provide a more efficient service for local businesses and residents for customers of all three operators.

In the case of the Slade Hill Farm site it is confirmed that in order for ‘everything everywhere’ to use the equipment it is necessary to link a dish to another ‘everything everywhere’/‘3’ network site north of the application site. The proposed dish at Slade Hill Farm will link with another dish within the local area to provide a greater coverage and service level for the area.

5. **Site Selection Process – alternative sites considered and not chosen**

If no alternative site options have been investigated, please explain why:

Given the existing telecommunications monopole installation is being utilised by ‘everything everywhere’ it is considered that there was no need to investigate alternative sites in this case.

Additional relevant information:

______________________________________________________________________

2 The modulation method employed in GSM is GMSK (Gaussian Minimum Shift Keying) which is a form of Phase modulation. The modulation method employed in UMTS is QPSK (Quad Phase Shift Keying) which is another form of Phase Modulation. SUPPORTING STATEMENT

This statement forms part of an application on behalf of ‘everything everywhere’ (which represents T-Mobile and Orange) and ‘3’. It has been prepared in accordance with the requirements of Section 42 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 which requires the submission of a Design and Access Statement to accompany planning applications.

Application for Planning Permission

This application for planning permission is submitted pursuant to Article 4C of the Town and Country Planning (General Development Procedure) Order 1995 (as amended). This statement also supports the associated application for Listed Building Consent.

Application Background

Please refer to section 4 above which explains the need for the development.

Site Design and Appearance incorporating Design & Access Statement

This application comprises the installation of a 300mm dish antenna to be attached by a support pole to the existing telecommunications monopole site at Slade Hill Farm, along with association cabling to be attached to existing cable tray and equipment to be installed inside an existing equipment cabinet (see drawings). The new dish will be coloured to match the existing equipment.

The Application Site

Physical, Social and Economic Context

The application site is on an existing telecommunications monopole at Slade Hill Farm in Taddington, Buxton, Derbyshire. The site is located within the Peak District National Park. The monopole is currently host to other telecommunications apparatus utilised by ‘everything everywhere’ at present.

The site is situated within the Peak District National Park and the National Park encloses the whole village of Taddington and the vast surrounding area, excluding the town of Buxton to the West. The proposal area is very rural with no mentionable development in the vicinity of the host monopole. The village of Taddington itself is approximately 400m to the north east of the proposal site and is made up of a few small businesses and some residential property, none of which have a view to the proposal site due to the relief of the local landscape. The application area has a quiet atmosphere and is generally only accessed by land owners of the surrounding fields or hill walkers.

The wider area is also very rural in nature with only a few sparsely sited farm buildings with few access roads/lanes. The proposal site is not visible from any of these farmhouses or access routes.

It is considered that the siting of the 300mm dish antenna upon a telecommunications monopole is a suitable location for the necessary equipment. It is considered that, in spite of the monopole being sited within the National Park, the proposed minimal addition of the equipment will not have a negative impact upon the character, setting or views of the National Park.

Views to the proposed development are only possible from close proximity to the existing monopole from the surrounding fields. From walking around the local area it is apparent that, unless one knows where to look, the proposed 300Ø dish would not be noticeable with the existing telecommunications apparatus not visible from general views and is screened from many areas by the natural relief of the local landscape. Furthermore, given the proposed development will be attached with existing telecommunications apparatus and will also be coloured to blend with the existing equipment it is considered that the proposal, subject to this application will not be prominent, incongruous or inappropriate. Furthermore, the existing monopole has also been screened from lower levels by a 1.3m high stone wall to further ensure it blends into the natural surroundings.

**Scale and Amount of Development**

Owing to a network-sharing project being undertaken by ‘everything everywhere’ (a joint venture company made up of T-Mobile and Orange) at a number of sites existing telecommunications apparatus is being utilised by both operators, this proposal will also be utilised by ‘3’.

In the case of the Slade Hill Farm site it is confirmed that in order for ‘everything everywhere’ to use the equipment it is necessary to link a dish to another ‘everything everywhere’ network site north of the application site. The proposed dish at Slade Hill Farm will link with another dish within the local area to provide a greater coverage and service for local residents and businesses using T-Mobile, Orange and ‘3’.

**Layout and Appearance**

It is considered that the existing development represents a satisfactory design solution and it will not have an inappropriate affect upon the local area, especially considering its construction will ensure the provision of improved mobile phone coverage to customers of T-Mobile, Orange and 3.

**Landscaping**

It is considered that landscaping is not required at this site.

**Access**

**Construction and Maintenance Access**

The site will be constructed in accordance with all health and safety guidelines and appropriate notices will be served upon the Council. Maintenance will be carried out in the same manner.

**Public Access**

Radio base stations are not designed to be accessible by the public. Therefore no specific public access provisions are required to be incorporated into the design of the proposal. Possible Electrical Interference

We can advise on behalf of our client that the proposed installation should not cause any undue electrical interference for nearby residents. MBNL operate within radio frequency bands, which are licensed and specific to T-Mobile and 3, and this is regulated by in the UK by the Office of Communications (Ofcom).

Health and Safety

The latest government research conducted by the Independent Expert Group on Mobile Phone Technology titled “Mobile Phones and Health” (also known as the Stewart Report) concluded that “the balance of evidence indicates that there is no general risk to the health of people living near to base stations on the basis that exposures are expected to be small fractions of the guidelines”.

However, the report also recommended, as a precautionary approach, that the ICNIRP guidelines for public exposure be adopted in the UK. In response to the report, the Government has stated that emissions from base stations should meet the ICNIRP guidelines and that if they do then local authorities need take no further action.

The Advisory Group on Non-Ionising Radiation report on 14 January 2004 represents the post Stewart review of scientific research into mobile phones, base stations and health, and is the an up to date piece of research into this issue. The report is based on a review of all the scientific research into mobile phone safety published over the years since the Stewart report and its findings confirms the findings of the Stewart report which concluded that the balance of evidence suggests that mobile phone technologies do not cause adverse health effects. The AGNIR report found that the weight of scientific evidence now available does not suggest that there are adverse health effects from RF fields below guideline levels and concluded that “Exposure levels from living near mobile phone base stations are extremely low, and the overall evidence indicates that they are unlikely to pose a risk to human health”. (p 148, AGNIR Report, January 2004)

In this instance, we believe that it is not necessary to consider health effects further as recommended by PPG8, which states that “If a proposed mobile phone base station meets the ICNIRP guidelines for public exposure, it should not be necessary for a local planning authority, in processing an application, to consider further the health aspects and concerns about them.”

MBNL are committed to ensuring that all new installations are ICNIRP compliant. The proposed development does not alter the existing ICNIRP status of the site and no certificate of ICNIRP compliance is required.

Noise

There will be no additional noise produced as a result of the installation of the proposed apparatus.

Planning Policy Framework / Development Plan Policy

Section 54A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) states that “in making any determination under the planning Acts, regard is to be had to the development plan, the determination is to be made in accordance with the plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.”

Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 states that “if regard is to be had to the development plan for the purposes of any determination to be made under the Planning Acts, the determination must be made in accordance with the Plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.”

The current Development Plan for the determination of the application is provided by The Peak District Local Plan, adopted March 2001. The following policies aim to protect the built environment and are relevant to the application proposal.

**BE LU5: Telecommunications Infrastructure**

“ (a) Telecommunications infrastructure will be permitted provided that:

(i) the landscape, built heritage or other valued characteristics of the National Park are not harmed;

and

(ii) it is not feasible to locate the development outside the National Park where it would have less impact;

and

(iii) the least obtrusive or damaging, technically practicable location, size, design and coloring of the structure and any ancillary equipment, together with appropriate landscaping, can be secured.

(b) Wherever possible, and where a reduction in the overall impact on the National Park can be achieved, telecommunications equipment should be mounted on existing masts, buildings or structures. Telecommunications equipment that extends above the roofline of a building on which it is mounted will only be allowed where it is the least damaging alternative.

(c) Substantial new development such as a mast or building for the remote operation and monitoring of equipment or plant not part of the code-system operator’s network will not be permitted.”

The necessity and importance of telecommunications development is recognised within the Local Plan. The Local Plan also acknowledges that national level policy states that local authorities should support national growth of the telecommunications industry while also stating that the government is committed to the protection of designated areas such as National Parks, therefore to ensure that the needs of two national priorities are met it is important that the local policy stated above is strictly adhered to. It is suggested that the proposal meets all requirements set out in the policy within the Local Plan.

As stated in the earlier sections of this statement the proposal is a minimal addition to an existing telecommunications structure and is coloured to match the existing equipment to further minimise the visual impact. The proposal is not noticeable and cannot be viewed from the surrounding area and therefore does not adversely harm the National Park’s valued characteristics. The necessity of the proposal to maintain the level of coverage and service for the local area has also previously been detailed so an option outside the National Park does not meet the requirements. Taking all this into account it is considered that the proposal meets local and national policy in every aspect.

**National Planning Policy**

National guidance contained within planning policy statements, planning policy guidance notes and Governmental circulars have been determined to be material considerations in determining planning applications. In this instance, it is our opinion that the following advice is material:

**PPG8 – Telecommunications (2001)**

Planning Policy Guidance Note 8 – Telecommunications (Revised) August 2001 (PPG8) provides guidance on the planning requirements of telecommunication development and attention is drawn to the following paragraphs of PPG8.

Paragraph 1 states “The government’s policy is to facilitate the growth of new and existing telecommunications systems whilst keeping the environmental impact to a minimum.” Paragraph 2 continues “The aim of telecommunication policy is to ensure that people have a choice as to who provides their telecommunications services, a wider range of services from which to choose and equitable access to the latest technologies as they become available.”

In respect of need, paragraph 6 states “Authorities should not seek to prevent competition between different operators and should not question the need for the telecommunications systems which the proposed development is to support”.

**PPS 5 – Planning for the Historic Environment (2010)**

PPS 5 sets out planning policies on the conservation of the historic environment and should be taken into account by LPAs in the preparation of local development documents. The following policies are relevant to the consideration of the proposal subject of this application.

Paragraph 7 states that “the Government’s overarching aim is that the historic environment and its heritage assets should be conserved and enjoyed for the quality of life they bring to this and future generations.”

Policy HE3.1 states that “Local Development Frameworks should set out a positive, proactive strategy for the conservation and enjoyment of the historic environment in their area, taking into account the variations in type and distribution of heritage asset, as well as the contribution made by the historic environment.”

Policy HE3.4 states that “at local level, plans should consider the qualities and distinctiveness of local historic environment and how these can contribute to the development of the spatial vision in the local development framework core strategy. Heritage assets can be used to ensure continued sustainability of an area and promote a sense of place.”

Policy HE6.1 states that applicants “should provide a description of the significance of the heritage assets affected and the contribution of their setting to that significance. The level of detail should be proportionate to the importance of the heritage asset and no more than is sufficient to understand the potential impact on the significance of the heritage asset.”

Policy HE6.2 goes on to say that this information, along with an assessment of the proposal’s impact should be included in the application’s design and access statement.

Policy HE7.2 states that “In considering the impact of a proposal on any heritage asset, local planning authorities should take into account the particular nature of the significance of the heritage asset and the value that it holds for this and future generations. This understanding should be used by the local planning authority to avoid or minimise conflict between the heritage asset’s conservation and any aspect of the proposals.”

Policy HE7.4 states that “Local Planning Authorities should take into account:

- the desirability of sustaining and enhancing the significance of heritage assets, and of utilising their positive role in place-shaping; and
- the positive contribution that conservation of heritage assets and the historic environment generally can make to the establishment and maintenance of sustainable communities and economic vitality by virtue of the factors set out in HE3.1.”

Further information on the siting and design of the proposals is described above in this statement. Additionally, the minimal impact of the proposals can be seen on the enclosed drawings.

It is contended that the applicant has demonstrated above that the proposal accords with PPG 8 and PPS 5.

**Code of Best Practice on Mobile Phone Network Deployment - (November 2002)**

The office of the Deputy Prime Minister released the Code of Best Practice on Mobile Phone Network Deployment in November 2002. Though the Code is a non-statutory document, as it was prepared jointly by representatives of central and local government and the mobile phone industry, it is a material consideration in this instance. The Code provides a principled approach to best practice for the voluntary and compulsory planning procedures, and for the siting and design of telecommunication installations.

General design principles for the siting and design of all telecommunication installations is contained in paragraph 125 of the Code, though it is acknowledged in paragraph 126 that the options for design can be affected by site conditions, technical constraints, landscape features and capacity requirements.

Paragraphs 133 to 143 of the Code gives advice relating to the siting of telecommunications apparatus on existing buildings and how best to minimise impact, including disguising equipment.

Paragraph 135 states: “When placing equipment on buildings and/or structures operators should aim for development to:

- Be painted to correspond with the background or to reduce contrast;
- Keep in proportion to the building or structure;
- Respect architectural style; • Have minimal impact above the roofline; • Not be detrimental to views and general skyline; • Avoid creating clutter; • Use clean lines and maintain symmetry.”

Taking into account the information contained within the Code of Best Practice it is considered that the application submitted herewith fully embraces both the voluntary and compulsory good practice principles contained within the Code.

Conclusions

National planning policy as set out in PPG8 is to facilitate the growth of new and existing telecommunications systems, and operators have obligations to meet customer demands for improved quality of service. This application details the technical need for the installation to provide improved customer service.

The applicant has identified that this site is required to facilitate the improvement of their existing services in the local area. The proposed installation represents both the optimum planning/environmental and technical solution in this instance. As such the development as proposed is in accordance with both local and national planning guidance as defined above.

For the reasons set out above, we consider that this application for planning permission should be approved.

RELATED DOCUMENTS

The following documents may be of assistance in determining this application:

• PPG 8 http://www.communities.gov.uk/planningandbuilding/planning/planningpolicyguidance/planningpolicystatements/planningpolicyguidance/ppg8

• PPS 5 http://www.communities.gov.uk/planningandbuilding/planning/planningpolicyguidance/planningpolicystatements/planningpolicystatements/pps5/

• Code of Best Practice on Mobile Phone Network Development http://www.communities.gov.uk/index.asp?id=1144926

• Office of Communications (Ofcom) - www.ofcom.org.uk

Contact Details

Name: Sean McHenry Operator: ‘everything everywhere’ / ‘3’ Telephone: 0161 941 5481 Fax no: 0161 942 9150 Address: Fairbank House, Ashley Road, Altrincham, Cheshire, WA14 2DP. Email Address: Sean.mchenry@dalyinternational.com